beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The sentence of the court below against the defendant in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the following circumstances are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant was in the first instance trial and the Defendant did not repeat the crime by recognizing all of his/her mistakes; (b) the injury to the Victim B was fully recovered; (c) the damage to the Victim H was partially recovered; and (d) the Defendant did not have any history of having been punished in excess of the suspended sentence.
However, in light of the background, means and methods of each of the crimes in this case, the number of crimes, and the sum of the amount of deceptions, etc., the crime and the circumstances were not less than that of the crime, and the damage to the victim H was not fully recovered (the total amount of the recovered damage reaches KRW 4,1990,00) up to the trial, and the defendant did not receive a letter of apology from the above victim. Although long history, the defendant had been punished twice as the crime of fraud, there was no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the court below. In full view of all other circumstances, including the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.